Another thing I was just thinking since Mt.Gox blacklists "tainted funds" - they should go ahead and entertain the person to send their coins "to cash" out but never cash them out thus retrieving the coins again ?

What ...

lol....meaning mt.gox should let them send them their coins to "Cash out" but in reality never "Cash out" thus keeping the coins.

Thanks I respect yours also. No, I'm just saying for big thefts like the one's that have been happening I think there would be a big consensus in favor of disabling $87,000 worth of bitcoin. Yes, I don't know all the logistics of how it would play out but I'm pretty sure we are all smart enough to figure it out.

Ok say I buy 20,000 BTC worth of Gold from you. I pay you, you get the 6 confirms. I walk away with my ~$100K in gold. Then I report the coins stolen. Oops you lose 20K BTC. Even better I cal you up and threaten to report them stolen. If you give me back 5K BTC I won't report them stolen. You lose 5K or you lose 20K. Your choice.

Worse say I did steal 20K BTC. I then buy some gold form you. Nobody has reported them stolen ... yet. I pay you, you get the 6 confirms. I walk away with $100K in gold and then the original legit owner of the coins reports them stolen. I stole the coins and lost nothing. The owner is still out 20K coins and you are out $100K in gold.

Awesome system you got there. Also there is no central agency in Bitcoin. Who decides if a coin is disabled or not? Someone with 51% of hashing power. Awesome you just gave the govt an auto kill switch. Gain 51% control of Bitcoin (even temporarily) and disable all 21M coins. Game Over.

Corporations have been enthroned, An era of corruption in high places will follow and the money power will endeavor to prolong its reign by working on the prejudices of the people until wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. ~Abe Lincoln 1ApJdWUdSWYw8n8HEATYhHXA9EYoRTy7c4

Thanks I respect yours also. No, I'm just saying for big thefts like the one's that have been happening I think there would be a big consensus in favor of disabling $87,000 worth of bitcoin. Yes, I don't know all the logistics of how it would play out but I'm pretty sure we are all smart enough to figure it out.

Ok say I buy 20,000 BTC worth of Gold from you. I pay you, you get the 6 confirms. I walk away with my ~$100K in gold. Then I report the coins stolen. Oops you lose 20K BTC. Even better I cal you up and threaten to report them stolen. If you give me back 5K BTC I won't report them stolen. You lose 5K or you lose 20K. Your choice.

Worse say I did steal 20K BTC. I then buy some gold form you. Nobody has reported them stolen ... yet. I pay you, you get the 6 confirms. I walk away with $100K in gold and then the original legit owner of the coins reports them stolen. I stole the coins and lost nothing. The owner is still out 20K coins and you are out $100K in gold.

Awesome system you got there. Also there is no central agency in Bitcoin. Who decides if a coin is disabled or not? Someone with 51% of hashing power. Awesome you just gave the govt an auto kill switch. Gain 51% control of Bitcoin (even temporarily) and disable all 21M coins. Game Over.

You are assuming this is just for "anyone" to take advantage of ( maybe, a bitcoin business has to pay into this ) . No, I'm talking about the big business's where it clearly stolen and we know that is based on who the business is - are you saying someone legitimately withdrew 18,000 bitcoins ? In this case, yes Bitcoinica can say yes they were stolen and who is going to doubt them? - are you saying they would be pulling a fast one ? I'd rather have system like this then having bitcoins ripped off left and right I mean like someone mentioned there is going to be more stolen bitcoins then there is legitimate bitcoins are the rate we are going

Thanks I respect yours also. No, I'm just saying for big thefts like the one's that have been happening I think there would be a big consensus in favor of disabling $87,000 worth of bitcoin. Yes, I don't know all the logistics of how it would play out but I'm pretty sure we are all smart enough to figure it out.

Ok say I buy 20,000 BTC worth of Gold from you. I pay you, you get the 6 confirms. I walk away with my ~$100K in gold. Then I report the coins stolen. Oops you lose 20K BTC. Even better I cal you up and threaten to report them stolen. If you give me back 5K BTC I won't report them stolen. You lose 5K or you lose 20K. Your choice.

Worse say I did steal 20K BTC. I then buy some gold form you. Nobody has reported them stolen ... yet. I pay you, you get the 6 confirms. I walk away with $100K in gold and then the original legit owner of the coins reports them stolen. I stole the coins and lost nothing. The owner is still out 20K coins and you are out $100K in gold.

Awesome system you got there. Also there is no central agency in Bitcoin. Who decides if a coin is disabled or not? Someone with 51% of hashing power. Awesome you just gave the govt an auto kill switch. Gain 51% control of Bitcoin (even temporarily) and disable all 21M coins. Game Over.

You are assuming this is just for "anyone" to take advantage of ( maybe, a bitcoin business has to pay into this ) . No, I'm talking about the big business's where it clearly stolen and we know that is based on who the business is - are you saying someone legitimately withdrew 18,000 bitcoins ? In this case, yes Bitcoinica can say yes they were stolen and who is going to doubt them? - are you saying they would be pulling a fast one ? I'd rather have system like this then having bitcoins ripped off left and right I mean like someone mentioned there is going to be more stolen bitcoins then there is legitimate bitcoins are the rate we are going

I am pretty sure they were stolen by somebody from Nigeria. Or the boogeyman took them.

Why would they steal the BTC themselves when they would make more money from running the service and getting the fees

Thanks I respect yours also. No, I'm just saying for big thefts like the one's that have been happening I think there would be a big consensus in favor of disabling $87,000 worth of bitcoin. Yes, I don't know all the logistics of how it would play out but I'm pretty sure we are all smart enough to figure it out.

Ok say I buy 20,000 BTC worth of Gold from you. I pay you, you get the 6 confirms. I walk away with my ~$100K in gold. Then I report the coins stolen. Oops you lose 20K BTC. Even better I cal you up and threaten to report them stolen. If you give me back 5K BTC I won't report them stolen. You lose 5K or you lose 20K. Your choice.

Worse say I did steal 20K BTC. I then buy some gold form you. Nobody has reported them stolen ... yet. I pay you, you get the 6 confirms. I walk away with $100K in gold and then the original legit owner of the coins reports them stolen. I stole the coins and lost nothing. The owner is still out 20K coins and you are out $100K in gold.

Awesome system you got there. Also there is no central agency in Bitcoin. Who decides if a coin is disabled or not? Someone with 51% of hashing power. Awesome you just gave the govt an auto kill switch. Gain 51% control of Bitcoin (even temporarily) and disable all 21M coins. Game Over.

Blacklisting and destroying can work with the protocol as is. The biggest exchanges maintain blacklists and send any amount to /dev/null that sources from their blacklist unless the amount received already got that amount sent to /dev/null before.

If I send Bitcoins to MtGox and they destroy 1/1000th of them explaining it stems from that recent raid, I can take legal action against them but if judges start supporting this behavior there is little you can do in the protocol to stop it from happening. Now I can check where I got my coins tainted from ... ah .. SatoshiDice. I can demand my money back from this guy which would lead to him starting to use the black lists as well and as I don't want to hear from Gox how I had dirty fingers next time, I will also run the blacklists on my client.

Slippery slope but we are already on it. This will come the one way or the other.

Thanks I respect yours also. No, I'm just saying for big thefts like the one's that have been happening I think there would be a big consensus in favor of disabling $87,000 worth of bitcoin. Yes, I don't know all the logistics of how it would play out but I'm pretty sure we are all smart enough to figure it out.

Ok say I buy 20,000 BTC worth of Gold from you. I pay you, you get the 6 confirms. I walk away with my ~$100K in gold. Then I report the coins stolen. Oops you lose 20K BTC. Even better I cal you up and threaten to report them stolen. If you give me back 5K BTC I won't report them stolen. You lose 5K or you lose 20K. Your choice.

Worse say I did steal 20K BTC. I then buy some gold form you. Nobody has reported them stolen ... yet. I pay you, you get the 6 confirms. I walk away with $100K in gold and then the original legit owner of the coins reports them stolen. I stole the coins and lost nothing. The owner is still out 20K coins and you are out $100K in gold.

Awesome system you got there. Also there is no central agency in Bitcoin. Who decides if a coin is disabled or not? Someone with 51% of hashing power. Awesome you just gave the govt an auto kill switch. Gain 51% control of Bitcoin (even temporarily) and disable all 21M coins. Game Over.

Blacklisting and destroying can work with the protocol as is. The biggest exchanges maintain blacklists and send any amount to /dev/null that sources from their blacklist unless the amount received already got that amount sent to /dev/null before.

If I send Bitcoins to MtGox and they destroy 1/1000th of them explaining it stems from that recent raid, I can take legal action against them but if judges start supporting this behavior there is little you can do in the protocol to stop it from happening. Now I can check where I got my coins tainted from ... ah .. SatoshiDice. I can demand my money back from this guy which would lead to him starting to use the black lists as well and as I don't want to hear from Gox how I had dirty fingers next time, I will also run the blacklists on my client.

Slippery slope but we are already on it. This will come the one way or the other.

...or secure your coins and stop having exploits available as in the case of bitcoinica, EMAIL COMPROMISED AND ROOT RESET ?? That is the most hilarious security implimentation Ive heard of thus far, also why is so many people allowed access to the whole system, like zhou stated he wasnt sure which of the allowed accounts possibly made the withdrawal at first.

...In the land of the stale, the man with one share is king... >> Clipse

Thanks I respect yours also. No, I'm just saying for big thefts like the one's that have been happening I think there would be a big consensus in favor of disabling $87,000 worth of bitcoin. Yes, I don't know all the logistics of how it would play out but I'm pretty sure we are all smart enough to figure it out.

Ok say I buy 20,000 BTC worth of Gold from you. I pay you, you get the 6 confirms. I walk away with my ~$100K in gold. Then I report the coins stolen. Oops you lose 20K BTC. Even better I cal you up and threaten to report them stolen. If you give me back 5K BTC I won't report them stolen. You lose 5K or you lose 20K. Your choice.

Worse say I did steal 20K BTC. I then buy some gold form you. Nobody has reported them stolen ... yet. I pay you, you get the 6 confirms. I walk away with $100K in gold and then the original legit owner of the coins reports them stolen. I stole the coins and lost nothing. The owner is still out 20K coins and you are out $100K in gold.

Awesome system you got there. Also there is no central agency in Bitcoin. Who decides if a coin is disabled or not? Someone with 51% of hashing power. Awesome you just gave the govt an auto kill switch. Gain 51% control of Bitcoin (even temporarily) and disable all 21M coins. Game Over.

Blacklisting and destroying can work with the protocol as is. The biggest exchanges maintain blacklists and send any amount to /dev/null that sources from their blacklist unless the amount received already got that amount sent to /dev/null before.

If I send Bitcoins to MtGox and they destroy 1/1000th of them explaining it stems from that recent raid, I can take legal action against them but if judges start supporting this behavior there is little you can do in the protocol to stop it from happening. Now I can check where I got my coins tainted from ... ah .. SatoshiDice. I can demand my money back from this guy which would lead to him starting to use the black lists as well and as I don't want to hear from Gox how I had dirty fingers next time, I will also run the blacklists on my client.

Slippery slope but we are already on it. This will come the one way or the other.

There's a lot of complaining, arguing, and finger pointing going on in this thread and rightfully so. However, I think the first thing we should worry about is %100 reimbursement as fast as possible. Only after that should we worry who's to blame. Many people in this forum, including me, lost a considerable amount of money. Having that money just vanish is terrifying and until we get it all back will we be able to think straight and rationally.